So it is bridges now? Ok so answer me this.. Do City's tear down bridges after 6 years, or do they maintain them, repaint them, weld new pieces on, strengthen them, reinforce them?

If we go by your plan, we would tear down and build a new bridge every time a crack appears.

Man, this board really struggles with analogies.

In my original analogy about the bridge, Kubiak wold not be the actual bridge but the bridge builder.

In the analogy you're trying to concoct, Kubiak would still not be the bridge but he would be part of the bridge. Like, let's say, a critical truss or beam. If the beam is faulty, it should be replaced. No need to tear down the whole bridge.

With all due respect, his record as an NFL HC is definitely better than your record as an NFL HC yes?

A better comparison would be Wade's record as a HC opposed to Kubiak's. Wade's all time record as HC is 82-59. Kubiak's is 47-48. Before the season started Kubiak's record was 37-43 (before he benefitted from Wade), some might look at that first.

Actually going back and looking at Wade's records season by season I think he has been a better HC than what I have been giving him credit for.

The Immaculate Deception (some others refer to as the Music City Miracle) really did him in. Had he won that game I think his reputation as a HC would be much different.

The year he went 13-3 and lost to the Giants in the Divisional round, Romo went full on Romo in that game. Also that Giants team went on to win the Super Bowl by beating the undefeated Patriots.

I don't have to know how to build a bridge to be able to confirm a bridge is falling down just by looking at it.

Division winner, 3rd seed = falling down then?

Tell you what ... you take the Patriots without Brady/#2QB Hoyer/Welker/Andre Carter or the Steelers minus Big Ben/Batch/Wallace/Harrison or Polamalu or take the Ravens without Flacco/#2QB Taylor/Boldin/Suggs and lets see how good their records are.

I'll take what this franchise has done this year over ^^that every time.

A better comparison would be Wade's record as a HC opposed to Kubiak's. Wade's all time record as HC is 82-59. Kubiak's is 47-48. Before the season started Kubiak's record was 37-43 (before he benefitted from Wade), some might look at that first.

Actually going back and looking at Wade's records season by season I think he has been a better HC than what I have been giving him credit for.

The Immaculate Deception (some others refer to as the Music City Miracle) really did him in. Had he won that game I think his reputation as a HC would be much different.

The year he went 13-3 and lost to the Giants in the Divisional round, Romo went full on Romo in that game. Also that Giants team went on to win the Super Bowl by beating the undefeated Patriots.

In my original analogy about the bridge, Kubiak wold not be the actual bridge but the bridge builder.

In the analogy you're trying to concoct, Kubiak would still not be the bridge but he would be part of the bridge. Like, let's say, a critical truss or beam. If the beam is faulty, it should be replaced. No need to tear down the whole bridge.

Obviously you know less about bridges than you do football... How often is an entire beam replaced? Rarely.... a faulty beam would be reinforced (Wade) not replaced. The load on a bridge... wait. Why am I allowing you to drag me into this ridiculous argument?

No matter how you slice it Kubiak has more experience, and knows more about football than any of you fans who say he should do it your way. You can make any number of analogies you like to deflect the hard truth about what I am saying.

If there is an opening for a head coach in the NFL or an analyst on TV, Kubiak's name will be called... not your's.

Obviously you know less about bridges than you do football... How often is an entire beam replaced? Rarely.... a faulty beam would be reinforced (Wade) not replaced. The load on a bridge... wait. Why am I allowing you to drag me into this ridiculous argument?

Nobody's dragging you, believe me. And it is ridiculous.

My point stands: I don't have to be an NFL head coach to know how to count wins and losses.

No matter how you slice it Kubiak has more experience, and knows more about football than any of you fans who say he should do it your way. You can make any number of analogies you like to deflect the hard truth about what I am saying.

I am sure most posters here could take the Texans to 0 playoff appearances in their first 5 seasons without Wade as DC too.

Quote:

If there is an opening for a head coach in the NFL or an analyst on TV, Kubiak's name will be called... not your's.

I HIGHLY doubt Kubiak gets hired as anyone's HC without going back to being someone's OC first. TV analyst? Well you have to watch all of the plays (even the crucial ones) to do that.

Yes, Wade is definitely more valuable as a DC than Kubiak is as a Head Coach.

More valuable as a HC than Kubiak? Probably.

More valuable as a HC with an unnamed OC compared to Kubiak with Wade as DC? I HIGHLY DOUBT IT.

Would Kubiak stay as OC if we made Wade the Head Coach? I dunno, but I doubt that too.

I don't want to give up on the combination of Wade AND Kubiak, regardless of their order. I think they are as good as it gets. If we had a starting QB--no offense to Yates--I think we'd be VERY happy with both of them.

I love the "expert" argument. I guess since I am not a football coach, I cant critique football coaches. I guess in that same thread, I cant critique President Obama, because I have never been President. Hell, I cant critique any politician.

I love the "expert" argument. I guess since I am not a football coach, I cant critique football coaches. I guess in that same thread, I cant critique President Obama, because I have never been President. Hell, I cant critique any politician.

Well, I see you're 21. Have you run into the "you can't do this JOB until you've got experience doing it" argument? I call it the "F&^% Gen X forever" argument, or the "Gen X can have jobs when all the non-retiring (because they owe 15 gazillion on credit cards) Baby Boomers die" argument.

Yes, Wade is definitely more valuable as a DC than Kubiak is as a Head Coach.

More valuable as a HC than Kubiak? Probably.

More valuable as a HC with an unnamed OC compared to Kubiak with Wade as DC? I HIGHLY DOUBT IT.

Would Kubiak stay as OC if we made Wade the Head Coach? I dunno, but I doubt that too.

I don't want to give up on the combination of Wade AND Kubiak, regardless of their order. I think they are as good as it gets. If we had a starting QB--no offense to Yates--I think we'd be VERY happy with both of them.

Agreed...

It took this organization ten years to find a combination that works; i.e., led to a division championship/playoff berth. Ten damned, painful years.

And now we finally have a combination of coaches and players that is formidable.

In my mind, we have a two-headed head coach. McNair all but said as much back in January...

Quote:

(on how important it might be to get a defensive coordinator with head coaching experience) “I think that a person with that background brings a lot to the table, because your head coach is in a unique position, and to have someone on his staff who’s been in that same position and understands what he’s going through when he has some tough questions that he has to answer, it’s someone he can go to and sit down and discuss some of those issues and know that they have a common background. So I think it adds quite a bit.”

Also Uncle Bob seemed to be perfectly happy with our offense...

Quote:

(on why he released the four defensive coaches and what criteria he’ll use in hiring their replacements) “When you look at our team and ask the question, ‘What is the problem here?’, it’s pretty clear. Our offense is the third-ranked offense in the league. We’ve got some offensive weapons that some other teams would love to have. If you take our quarterback Matt Schaub, our running back Arian Foster, our wide receiver Andre Johnson, our tight ends Owen Daniels and Joel Dreessen, and throw (TE) James Casey in there, you take those four positions, and what team in the league has got better players at those four positions? Not just picking one of them, but at all four of those positions, you’d be hard-pressed to find somebody that’s better equipped at those four positions. So we’ve got an awful lot of talent that’s still young, and the problem that we’ve had is that we haven’t been able to stop the other team. They’ve been scoring 28, 29 points a game (on) average. You just can’t do that and win in the NFL. So clearly, we weren’t getting the job done on defense. We just had to make a change, and we’re going to bring in an experienced, proven defensive coordinator that has had good, solid defenses throughout his career.”

All that to say, Uncle Bob has found a combo that he thinks works. And since that combo brought him (and the city of Houston) his (and it's) first double-digit win season and division championship in nearly a generation, he's keepin' both of 'em.

And I don't blame him.

Good luck trying to talk him into breaking up his newly found matched pair.

And <shudder> should Wade leave for yet another head coaching gig, I'll bet you all my lottery winnings (which total about $20 at the moment) that he goes after another fired head coach with a defensive background. I doubt we'll ever experiment with elevating a position coach to defensive coordinator again.

Too bad it took Uncle Bob ten years to figure this out. But, hey, better late than never.

[quote=Nitrofish;1864477]I think my point is that you and others who second guess Kubiak's decisions all think they would be better as the HC and that the opinions you express are right even though you have never coached an NFL game or even if Kubiak game planned the way SOME fans want him to that it would lead to a win.

In regards to your second comment, we are not talking about your job, but if we were and Kubiak said he knew better than you on what to do, guess what.. I would listen to you since you have the experience. You just made my point.

Are you really telling me that if the Texans had won the last two games it would have made any difference? No.. People would have just said we were supposed to beat them and look at their record. Funny how double standards work. If we win, it's a so what, if we lose it's a OMG!!! {Quote:}

I'm not saying I would be a better HC than Gary. I'm saying Gary isn't a good HC. He's a slightly below average HC and his ecord bears this out. 6 yrs is a long enough sample size to come to this conclusion.

If the Texans would've won out they would've had atleast the #2 seed with the Ravens losing Chargers and a shot at the #1 seed.

This shows your lack of knowledge in playoff seedings. At this point there's nothing that I'm going to say to change your mind and I'm sure you will come up with another ridiculous comparison to somehow compare my NFL HC abilities to Garys as a way to defend his 47-48 record as a NFL HC. My record as a NFL HC is 0-0 which is better than Garys. See how ridiculous this argument is. Gary is a better HC than me. But the ? should be is Gary a SB winning HC. My answer after watching him be a HC for 6 yrs is no. Yours is yes. THE END

We've seen what happens to our defense when our offense can not stay on the field.

Wade Phillips gets us the ball, Kubiak keeps it & puts points on the board more often than not.

Take that away, & you're looking at the Chicago Bears right now, they needed a win last night, but the QB they picked up off the street, the guy who was coaching high-school football 3 weeks ago, couldn't do it, couldn't get it done... imagine that.

Take away our offense, you've got the Cleveland Browns & the Jacksonville Jaguars, two teams with good defenses that are among the worst teams in the NFL. They can't stay on the field, much less score, they cause turnovers & keep their defense on the field...

This is a team game. Until we win a 9-3 football game, you can't say our defense won a game for us. All year, the defense has done their part, but the offense has as well, except for the Carolina game & the Colts game.

You can add the Cincinnati game as well, if it wasn't for a late drive from the offense, the offense would have came up short... defense did it's thing, the offense needed that drive.

We come out against Carolina & the offense gave the ball up on 3 drives, two directly attributed to the QB.

We need to get back to Texans football. Running the ball, staying in the lead, taking care of the football, Playing damn good defense, but get off the field, more importantly, get their offense off the field.

You may not like it. I get it. But that's the game we've got to get back to & that's exactly what Gary Kubiak is getting us back to. It doesn't look pretty now, it may not look pretty next week. But if it don't get there by Jan 7, we won't win if we don't get it to where it's supposed to be.

If you had to pick one I really can't think of a valid argument as to why you would pick Kubiak over Wade. I know, because you could let Wade walk and Kubiak could pick the new D coordinator, genius.....